Hi,
it seems to be that me have a major problem of core package maintainers
coordinating features in Fedora.
See for example:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174945
There the problem is, that dracut runs a fsck check before deciding
whether to resume. This can result in a big file system corruption,
since the kernel had a different idea of the file system state after
resuming from hibernation that there really is. The problem has several
core players that do not seem to communicate:
- dracut which uses systemd and showed this problem in F21 (I did not
notice it in F20)
- systemd:
- might have changed things in F21 to break resuming
- Does only parse the kernel command line, does not parse the
options that dracut gathers from the system during initramfs
generation
- provides hibernation support via "systemctl hibernate", which is
also what pm-hibernate does (why do we have two tools for the same
core task?)
- anaconda, which does not add a resume= kernel command line option when
installing a system
Therefore please coordinate with others if you maintain a key component
for a core distribution feature and look for other items that need to be
adjusted.
Regards
Till

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Replace Bacula with Bareos =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Bareos
Change Owner(s): Simone Caronni <negativo17 at gmail.com>
The powerful Bacula network backup solution has switched from being Open
Source friendly to being almost closed source. Originally the project was
conceived totally as Open Source, but since the creation of Bacula Systems and
its proprietary Bacula Enterprise Edition product, the Open Source (now called
"Community Edition") has received less and less updates and is mostly
abandoned.
== Detailed description ==
The most important points that are left "abandoned" are the following:
* Installation scripts and updates to makefiles are not updated anymore.
* New plugins and functionalities are not added anymore, except those in the
"core" daemons.
* Gaphical (and buggy) console has not received any update in almost two
years.
* Patches and bugs opened in the bug tracker are mostly left abandoned. Even
trivial fixes are not imported in the source.
* Windows binaries are no longer provided, nor the source for the clients has
been updated. Even if compiled with difficulties, there is no support for recent
Windows versions.
A former Bacula developer, frustrated by the situation created the fork Bareos
a long time ago from Bacula 5.2.x (the current Fedora and RHEL 7 version).
This version has now received '''a lot of bugfixes''' compared to the original
Bacula source. This makes compilation and installation a lot easier than it
was with Bacula.
On top of this, a '''lot of new features''' have been added; some unique to
Bareos but many available only in the closed source Bacula Enterprise.
Here is the list of new features compared to the current Bacula 5.2.13:
* http://www.bareos.org/en/whats_new.html
Some highlights include NDMP support for enterprise class storage (NetApp,
etc.), support for enterprise class tape libraries and Windows support
(including Windows Server 2012) with Bareos generated binaries.
For further details on why a Bacula fork was created please look at the
following links:
* http://www.bareos.org/en/faq/items/why_fork.html
Bareos can also be '''fully compatible with Bacula''' by setting a specific
configuration directive in the Daemon configuration files; thus providing the
option for RHEL 6/7 users to interoperate with Fedora systems.
* http://www.bareos.org/en/faq/items/bareos_bacula_compatibility.html
== Scope ==
To accomplish the goal, the following Bacula packages need to be replaced with
Bareos equivalents:
bacula
bacula-docs
Currently, the same Fedora packages can be rebuilt as they are, to work also
on CentOS/RHEL 5 and 6, upgrading the EPEL or official Bacula packages in the
distributions. This is to have a consistent backup infrastructure across all
the Fedora/CentOS/RHEL ecosystem.
To ease installation, a repository for installing those packages on a
CentOS/RHEL system do exist:
http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/slaanesh/bacula/README.txt
The idea is the same for Bareos: import into Fedora 21 packages that can be
rebuilt for all supported Fedora/RHEL/CentOS releases and provide a repository
that can upgrade any Bacula release currently installed in the system with the
new one. In detail; the upgrade scenarios supported when going from Bacula to
Bareos would be:
From Bacula 2.4:
* RHEL/CentOS 5 with EPEL repository
From Bacula 5.0:
* RHEL/CentOS 6
From Bacula 5.2.13:
* Fedora 18+
* RHEL/CentOS 5
* RHEL/CentOS 6
As written before, the change is impacting only Fedora 21, the list of
upgrades supported are only for users who want a consistent backup solution
across the enterprise.
=== External activities ===
Proposal owners: I'm the current Bacula mantainer in Fedora and will complete
the transition in time for the release.
Other developers: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
Release engineering: the release engineering team should make sure the new
Bareos packages are in place instead of the current Bacula packages for the
new release.
Policies and guidelines: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
_______________________________________________
devel-announce mailing list
devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce

Hi,
Since http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-March/029482.html
systemd-timesyncd can be enabled in more places. (That change isn't in F22 now
but could be backported easily). Looking at the state
of things here, there was a previous discussion on the desktop list:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2014-September/010751.html
>From an Atomic Host perspective,
systemd-timesyncd now looks fairly equivalent to chrony, and is 140k
that's already shipped. (Though if systemd didn't do internal static
linking that'd likely be noticeably smaller...anyways, the packaging of
systemd is a separate discussion).
Anaconda looks like it only supports chrony. Although,
it seems weird that Anaconda itself is doing the bridging of DHCP
NTP servers to chrony config - seems like something to fix in
NetworkManager itself so that it knows how to copy configuration
acquired at install time to the target.
And even then, it seems like we could get away with not setting
the NTP servers persistently from the DHCP lease acquired at
install time, and instead just rely on NM/systemd-networkd to
set them when the system boots again, right?
This however would require NetworkManager -> timesyncd
integration. Filed that as
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=746911
It appears to me that at least Fedora Server has ntp installed
but not running, which (looks) is due to freeipa-client having
a Requires: on ntp. Which came from
https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2974
Besides gnome-control-center then, I guess the switch of
systemd-timedated to only supporting systemd-timesyncd
impacts FreeIPA too.
But it wouldn't seem that hard for gnome-control-center and
freeipa-client to grow minimal awareness of how to use
systemd-timesyncd's dbus api to set the server.
Currently I'm leaning towards enabling systemd-timesyncd by default
for Atomic Host at least, but sending this mail to get a discussion
across the products.

Hi,
So I get a regular reminder for "Your Outstanding Requests"
However, a bunch of these are on closed bugs. It seems stuck somehow in
thinking it needs something from me. For example:
Bug 815617: PATCH: properly deal with crypt() returning NULL (1043 days old)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815617https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=585827&action=edit
This bug is already closed. And has no "flags" set. In the past someone
set the review flag, which i think is why this is showing up for me. But
I cannot get rid of it.
I have a few more of these in the review category. How can I get rid of
these?
Paul

I noticed on RHEL 6 that when a large amount of disk I/O is happening that
CPU bound tasks "slow down". I have been able to reproduce it in Fedora 21
as well and here are the instructions of how I can reproduce it with a
simple test:
1) Build the disk_test.cc (the "CPU bound task") and run it.
2) Create a large file to copy ( fallocate -l 10G junk ).
3) Copy that file with a one minute delay between copies ( while true; do
cp junk junk2; sleep 60; done )
If you direct the output of disk_test.cc to a file, then you can plot the
results in gnuplot with the following commands to see the change in the
mean time between "finishing the work cycle" when the file is being copied:
set xdata time
set timefmt "%s"
plot "out.txt" using 1:3 with lines
You can also notice that the load average is also going up, so it seems
like something in the kernel/scheduler is getting some sort of exclusive
lock in the disk I/O process and that's causing the CPU bound task to not
be able to execute when it should. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Dave